Sanctions against Iran-Pros and Cons

There is no controversy over whether Iran is processing radioactive materials and building nuclear reactors. It is.

The problem is that Iran may intend to develop nuclear weapons, as the United States and other countries believe is the case. In some estimates, Iran is just around the corner from weapons' capabilities, while in others, it will be a decade before it has a usable weapon.

If Iran, a signatory to the 1968 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, is developing nuclear weapons, the international community is obligated to seek to halt development. However, it has been almost impossible to determine Iran's intentions. The international community has yet to clarify either Iran's future intentions or its current capabilities .

The perplexing result is that the Western nuclear powers are conducting two slightly different dialogues at once. One questions whether Iran has nuclear weapons/ intentions. Iran says no, the U.S. says yes. A second layer of dialogue assumes that Iran is already developing weapons, and that Iran and Western nuclear powers must sit down and negotiate Iran's nuclear program. The U.S. also insists that Iran halt uranium enrichment before any negotiations begin.

The Iranian response is equally confusing. Iran has indicated its willingness to negotiate while also, consistently, rejecting the Americans' terms, and refusing to halt uranium enrichment.

Disagreement over the terms of any negotiation have made it nearly impossible to get Iran and the EU or the US to the table in any sustained way. The U.S. seeks sanctions as a way to resolve this impasse. But, while it may provide some resolution, it may also bypass the potential benefits of continuing to seek negotiations.

The decision that economic sanctions be leveled on Iran was already on the table on September 12, 2006, when Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told reporters that sanctions will inevitably follow Iran's continuing refusal to suspend uranium enrichment, since "the international community can bring a lot of isolation on Iran." When speaking on the 12th, Rice did hold out the possibility that Iran might suspend enrichment and end up negotiating.

Sanctions to be discussed at U.N. General Assembly

The cancellation of a next round of EU-Iran negotiations scheduled for September 14, however, essentially put to rest any talk at the U.S. end of putting off discussion of sanctions. Rice indicated on September 13 that foreign ministers attending the U.N. General Assembly in New York the following week would be discussing sanctions.

Iran inaugurated plans to develop nuclear power capabilities in the 1950s, under the rule of Muhammad Reza Shah Pahlavi. It developed its program rapidly, but the 1979 Islamic revolution and the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s forestalled further development until the late 1980s.

In 2003, the United Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency began conducting inspections of Iran's nuclear facilities. At that point, the IAEA discovered a number of violations of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. As reported by the Nuclear Threat Initiative Organization:

"Iran admitted to having construction plans for two enrichment facilities, a heavy water production plant, a fuel fabrication plant, and undertaken research into conversion and enrichment activities (including centrifuges and possibly lasers)."

For the next two years, the IAEA, Iran, the United States and the European Union issued competing claims and statements about Iran's intentions regarding:

• The intended use of nuclear reactors being built at Bushehr, Natanz and Arak;
• The degree to which Iran had developed its ability to weaponize independently;
• Whether Iraq truthfully reported all of its materials and sites to international inspectors;
• If the issue should be referred to the U.N. Security Council for resolution;
• Whether the incentives, sanctions or even military action are proper responses;

Iran temporarily, voluntarily suspended development activities from November, 2004 to August, 2005, then alerted the IAEA that it was resuming activities. The IAEA Director General report that followed remarked on this, as well as reporting new findings. In September, 2005, the IAEA for the first time found Iran to be non-compliant with its NPT obligations, which made referral to the Security Council a possibility. The IAEA Board reported Iran to the Security Council in February 2006. A month later, Secretary of State Rice said there was "no greater challenge" to the United States than Iran's nuclear program.